Background: There is convincing evidence for the benefits of resistance training on vertical jump improvements, but little evidence to guide optimal training prescription. The inability to detect small between modality effects may partially reflect the use of ANOVA statistics. This study represents the results of a sub-study from a larger project investigating the effects of two resistance training methods on load carriage running energetics. Bayesian statistics were used to compare the effectiveness of isoinertial resistance against speed-power training to change countermovement jump (CMJ) and squat jump (SJ) height, and joint energetics.
Methods: Active adults were randomly allocated to either a six-week isoinertial (n = 16; calf raises, leg press, and lunge), or a speed-power training program (n = 14; countermovement jumps, hopping, with hip flexor training to target pre-swing running energetics). Primary outcome variables included jump height and joint power. Bayesian mixed modelling and Functional Data Analysis were used, where significance was determined by a non-zero crossing of the 95% Bayesian Credible Interval (CrI).
Results: The gain in CMJ height after isoinertial training was 1.95 cm (95% CrI [0.85-3.04] cm) greater than the gain after speed-power training, but the gain in SJ height was similar between groups. In the CMJ, isoinertial training produced a larger increase in power absorption at the hip by a mean 0.018% (equivalent to 35 W) (95% CrI [0.007-0.03]), knee by 0.014% (equivalent to 27 W) (95% CrI [0.006-0.02]) and foot by 0.011% (equivalent to 21 W) (95% CrI [0.005-0.02]) compared to speed-power training.
Discussion: Short-term isoinertial training improved CMJ height more than speed-power training. The principle adaptive difference between training modalities was at the level of hip, knee and foot power absorption.
Keywords: Bayesian; Biomechanics; Energetics; Isoinertial; Kinetics; Resistance training; Speed-power; Vertical jump.